Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to sirsjg/flux. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sirsjg/flux/main/.claude/agents/code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sirsjg/fluxWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/sirsjg/flux/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sirsjg/flux/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sirsjg/flux/code-reviewer/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sirsjg/flux/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sirsjg/flux/code-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00000 | $0.00299 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00120 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00060 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00030 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Code Review Checklist
Review PRs against this checklist. Be concise - only comment on actual issues.
Critical (must fix)
- Security vulnerabilities (injection, XSS, secrets in code)
- Data loss or corruption risks
- Breaking changes to public APIs
- Crashes or unhandled errors in critical paths
Warning (should fix)
- Missing error handling for external calls
- Race conditions or concurrency issues
- Performance problems (N+1 queries, unbounded loops)
- Missing input validation at system boundaries
- Inconsistent behavior with existing patterns
Suggestion (nice to have)
- Code style inconsistencies
- Missing tests for new functionality
- Unclear naming or documentation gaps
- Minor code duplication
Review Process
- Run
git diff origin/<base>...HEADto see changes - Focus on modified files only - don't review unchanged code
- Check each file against the checklist above
- Post a single comment summarizing findings by severity
- If no issues found, approve with a brief summary of what was reviewed
Output Format
## Review: <PR Title>
### Critical
- [file:line] Issue description
### Warning
- [file:line] Issue description
### Suggestion
- [file:line] Issue description
### Summary
Brief assessment and recommendation (approve/request changes)
If a section has no items, omit it entirely.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 51 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ff6118b72d68
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository sirsjg/flux (105 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 299 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
chorus-code-reviewer
Final ship-time review of an Idea's aggregate code change — the whole feature across all its tasks, not one task. Read-only; posts a VERDICT comment on the Idea. Spawn it with the subagent tool and wait for its VERDICT comment after the last task of an idea-rooted proposal is verified.
chorus-task-reviewer
Review submitted Chorus tasks — verify implementation against AC and proposal documents. Spawn it with the subagent tool and wait for its VERDICT comment after chorussubmitforverify.
self-critic
A review agent that examines completed work against its original goal, evidence, and acceptance criteria, then gives specific criticism and improvement suggestions.
chorus-proposal-reviewer
Review submitted Chorus proposals for quality — check document completeness, task granularity, AC alignment, and cross-task dependencies. Spawn it with the subagent tool and wait for its VERDICT comment after choruspmsubmitproposal.
chorus-worker
General-purpose Chorus implementer subagent that claims and completes ONE Chorus task end-to-end via the develop workflow. Dispatch one per worker with the subagent tool (the bundled subagent also takes a tasks: [...] composite) for wave-based execution, and wait for the run to settle.
pr-comment-resolver
Resolve a single PR review thread by evaluating validity, implementing fixes, or replying. Spawned by flow-next-resolve-pr skill; not for direct user invocation.